Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramandeep Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Another on 2 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044207
Neutral Citation No. 2024:PHHC:044207
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
299 CRM-M No.1482 of 2023
Date of decision: 02.04.2024
RAMANDEEP KAUR .... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA
Present : Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Satjot Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Vishal Munjal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
MANISHA BATRA, J. (oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of
Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.66 dated 19.11.2020 under
Sections 384, 511, 506 and 509 of IPC registered at Police Station Women,
District Police Commissionerate Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all the
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed
dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure P-2).
2. The aforementioned FIR had been lodged by respondent
No.2/complainant and investigation was commenced thereon.
3. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that a compromise
has been arrived at between the parties and they have resolved their inter se
dispute, which was reduced into writing as compromise deed dated 17.11.2022
annexed with the present petition as Annexure P-2.
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044207
4. On the basis of said compromise, the petitioner has prayed for
quashing of the aforesaid FIR and all the subsequent proceedings on the
ground that continuation of such proceedings would be a futile exercise.
5. This Court vide order dated 01.02.2024 had directed the parties to
appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements
with regard to the genuineness of the compromise stated to have been arrived
at between them. The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was also directed to send
his/her report along with the said statements.
6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Jalandhar has sent copy of report vide endorsement No. 79 dated 28.03.2024 to
this Court along with photocopies of the statements of respondent
No.2/complainant-Anchit Kaur, petitioner/accused statement of Investigating
Officer ASI-Shishpal Singh recorded on 27.03.2024.
7. On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned
Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out of
free Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the
report that apart from the petitioner, there is no other accused in the FIR and
that the accused has not been declared proclaimed person in this case.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and besides perusing
the report by learned Judicial Magistrate, have also perused the record.
9. It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow
compounding of a non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to prevent the
abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Such power
is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. In this regard, reference can be
made to a Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044207
State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052. It is equally settled position
of law that the power of High Court in quashing criminal proceedings or FIR
or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is of wide plenitude with no
statutory limitation. Such power can certainly be exercised in cases relating to
offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes
where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have
resolved their entire dispute. The High Court is required to consider whether it
would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the
criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would
tantamount to abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of
justice, it is appropriate to put an end to the criminal case and if the answer to
such question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its
jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be
made to Hon'ble Apex Court judgments cited as Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Narinder Singh and
others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466.
10. In view of the proposition as settled in the aforementioned cases,
this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse process of
the Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case which squarely
falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents and that
allowing and accepting the prayer of the petitioner by quashing of the FIR
would be securing the ends of justice, which is primarily the object of
legislature enacted under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the petition is
allowed and the FIR No.66 dated 19.11.2020 under Sections 384, 511, 506 and
509 of IPC registered at Police Station Women, District Police
Commissionerate Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:044207
arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of
compromise dated 17.11.2022 (Annexure P-2).
11. Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms
and conditions of the compromise and statements as recorded before learned
Judicial Magistrate.
(MANISHA BATRA)
02.04.2024 JUDGE
Jyoti-IV
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No.
Whether reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
